contemporary learning spaces evaluation
TRANSCRIPT
_________________________________________________________________________
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACES EVALUATION _________________________________________________________________________
08/07/14
AHS 2014
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │CONTENTS
CONTENTS _________________________________________________________________________
1. Purpose
2. Building Age
3. Furniture Comfort & Choice Flexibility Furniture Replacement
4. Day Lighting
5. Connectivity
Connection to Other Classrooms Connection to Hallway Connection to the Outdoors
6. Infrastructure/Utilities
Lighting HVAC Electricity/Power
7. Learning Spaces
Beyond the Classroom Media Centers Cafeterias Specialty Classrooms Professional Development Spaces
8. Next Steps
Appendix A: Survey Questions & Results
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 1
1. PURPOSE _________________________________________________________________________
“Priority 1.3: Integrate the use of contemporary learning spaces and supportive technologies into the instructional program delivery.”
This is one of the School Board’s established priorities in support of their one student-centered
goal: All Albemarle County Public Schools students will graduate having actively mastered the
lifelong-learning skills they need to succeed as 21st century learners, workers, and citizens.
In order to begin a rigorous and equitable integration of contemporary learning spaces, we
first need to understand our starting point. This evaluation inventoried all school learning
spaces to gauge how many support the 21st Century Student by aligning with the following
guiding principles:
Transparency
Sustainability
Flexibility
Mobility/Interactivity
Multi-age
Making Everywhere
Problem/Project/Passion Based Learning
Choice & Comfort
Inside/Outside
Ultimately, our goals for learning spaces are as follows:
Create learning spaces that inspire, encourage and compel students to become
designers, developers, producers and creators who participate in the learning process
in ways that ensure the engagement of higher-order thinking.
Create spaces that provide cross-curricular and multi-age opportunities that leverage
natural learning patterns.
Create environments that foster contagious creativity, cross cultural boundaries, and
bring groups together.
Offer choice in comfort. Offer choice in learning paths.
Process
This evaluation touches upon the most critical aspects of contemporary learning spaces.
Data were gathered from a variety of sources, primarily:
1. Architectural Drawings
2. Classroom Field Survey
The full survey is included in Appendix A. It involved a room by room walk-through
of all school buildings. It was completed by Building Services & DART staff.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 2
2. BUILDING AGE _________________________________________________________________________
Why does it matter?
Building age is a good snapshot of some overarching features of a school. For instance, the
age of the original building gives some sense of the era in which the school was designed.
The lack of day lighting in indicative of the 1970’s when Western Albemarle & Walton were
built. Other commonalties include older building tend to lack a variety of small support spaces
such as resource rooms. Lastly, building age is often an indicator of the overall condition of
the building.
What is not captured in these data?
Ongoing maintenance projects including flooring replacement, lighting upgrade or casework
refurbishment are not captured in these figures. Just because a building is 40 years old,
doesn’t mean it hasn’t been touched since then. These dates refer to classrooms only. Certain
schools had gyms or media center additions added later than the dates listed.
School Original
Building
Last Major Addition or
Renovation
Scottsville 1974 1981
Red Hill 1973 1982
Meriwether Lewis 1988 n/a
Murray Elementary 1960 1990
Yancey 1960 1990
Hollymead 1972 1991
Broadus Wood 1936 1994
Sutherland 1994 None
Crozet 1990 1996
Stony Point 1934 1996
Woodbrook 1966 1997
Western Albemarle 1977 1997
Stone Robinson 1961 1999
Baker-Butler 2002 n/a
Burley 1951 2002
Jouett 1966 2003
Monticello HS 1998 2003
Walton 1974 2004
Henley 1966 2006
Cale 1990 2008
Brownsville 1966 2009
Albemarle 1953 2009
Greer 1974 2012
Murray HS 1959 2013
Agnor-Hurt 1992 2015
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 3
3. FURNITURE _________________________________________________________________________
Why does it matter?
In terms of the built environment, furniture is that with which a student will most interact.
It directly impacts two of the key features of a contemporary learning space:
Comfort & Choice
Flexibility
This is an example of a piece of classroom furniture that still exists in many
of our schools. An attached desk & chair is neither comfortable nor does it
offer flexibility to the space. The division has over 50 classrooms where
students sit & work in these.
In contrast, below is an image from a recent renovation of a classroom at
Henley Middle School. Notice the variety of work surfaces, the presence of
casters which facilitate easy reconfiguration of the space, and the variety of seating choice,
all of which encourage movement.
Henley Middle School Design 2015 Classroom
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 4
3. FURNITURE (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Comfort & Choice
Picture a typical office chair, a conference room chair, or a meeting room chair. Now picture
a typical classroom chair. Notice a difference? Standard classroom chairs come in many
shapes and colors, but they are all hard & rigid. How can we expect students to be focused
& engaged if they are not comfortable?
Our bodies want to instinctively move & fidget. To force students to be rigid or sit still is
counter-productive to the learning work. Here are some examples of seating options that
promote movement. Unfortunately, a mere 75 (less than 10%) of the division’s classrooms
have such seating.
What is comfortable for one student is not necessarily comfortable for another. This is when
choice becomes a critical characteristic of a contemporary learning space. A room should
have a variety of seating choices. Examples of variety include a chair vs. a stool; a space to
work on the floor vs. to work at a desk or table vs. to work standing.
Survey Results
Comfort/Choice Examples Elementary Middle High
Soft Seating Options 7% 14% 10%
Seating that Promotes Movement 1% 3% 3%
Height adjustable tables/desks 0% 1% 0%
A variety of seating and/or work
environments 7% 5% 14%
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 5
3. FURNITURE (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Flexibility
The work of a 21st century student is dynamic. A student must navigate from working
independently, to working in a small group, to working in a large group. The space must be
just as dynamic as the work itself. Rows of independent desks & chairs are conducive to one
type of instruction: lecturing. A contemporary learning space needs to be much more.
Project-based learning, a maker-based curriculum and other key instructional shifts require
malleable environments. Furniture is a key aspect in making a classroom flexible. Specifics
such as furniture that is on wheels or lightweight or tables that flip up and be set aside,
creates an environment is easily reconfigured as deemed necessary by the type of work. The
current furniture in the division’s classrooms do not meet these characteristics.
Survey Results
Flexible Furniture Examples Elementary Middle High
Tables/desks on casters 2% 0% 4%
Flip-top Tables 1% 0% 2%
Chairs on casters 0% 0% <1%
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 6
3. FURNITURE (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Furniture Replacement Program
Overall, classroom furniture in ACPS is in ‘good’ condition. The replacement cycle for
classroom furniture is generally accepted as 15 to 20 years, so we are quickly reaching a
threshold as the furniture becomes aged, worn and dilapidated. We do not have the funds to
replace in kind, let alone upgrade to more innovative and flexible types. Currently, there is
not an adequate funding mechanism for replacement of furniture. Any significant new
furniture purchase has been in correlation with a larger capital project (i.e. an addition). The
Building Services’ operational budget contains a small amount to replace furniture, but it is
basically used to replace broken pieces. It does not allow for large-scale replacement, to
account for increasing enrollment, or to support the division’s emphasis on contemporary
learning spaces.
Tables/Desks
Condition Elem. Middle High
Excellent 5% 4% 8%
Good 94% 84% 88%
Poor 2% 11% 14%
Seating
Condition Elem. Middle High
Excellent 10% 2% 9%
Good 80% 86% 83%
Poor 14% 10% 14%
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 7
4. DAYLIGHTING _________________________________________________________________________
Why does it matter?
There are several reputable studies that correlate
day lighting to student performance. Similar
studies have been done on workplace productivity
and have produced similar results. The presence
of day light in a classroom is beneficial to the
students’ & teachers’ performance, mood, and
attendance.
Naturally lit Art Room at Greer Elementary Photo by Rancorn William Architects
What is not captured in these data?
The amount of daylight varies widely amongst the schools in the division. The survey did not
measure specific quantities of light nor size of windows. The survey generally categorized the
presence of the day lighting or not.
Daylighting Amounts
The full results are listed below, but it should be noted that ~90 classrooms in the division
have no natural light. The majority of these can be found in Albemarle, Western Albemarle,
Henley, Jouett & Walton.
Daylight Elementary Middle High
Window 98% 76% 81%
Exterior Door 34% 1% 3%
Skylight 1% 0% 0%
No Natural Light 2% 23% 17%
As a side note, just as important as the presence of day light is the ability to control it. A
continued investment in blinds or shades is necessary to achieve this. The majority of spaces
have some sort of blinds or shades, but they need to be maintained like any other component
of the building. If they are broken or difficult to use, they are often closed more often than
open. Closed blinds obviously negate the day lighting benefits of windows.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 8
5. CONNECTIVITY _________________________________________________________________________
Why does it matter?
“Connectivity” can mean a lot of things, but in this context it refers to the physical connection
of the learning space to other spaces: adjacent classrooms, the outdoors, the hallway,
breakout spaces, etc. Historically, schools were built as efficiently as possible in what is
referred to as a factory model. The floor plan is often a double-loaded corridor: a central
hallway with classrooms on both sides. There are hard boundaries between classrooms each
working independently of each other. This contradicts the majority of the characteristics of
contemporary learning spaces, specifically transparency, flexibility, mobility/interactivity,
multi-age, problem/project/passion based learning, & inside/outside.
If a school was to be built today, these lines between rooms & spaces are blurred. The
differentiation could be a wall, but it could also be transparent glass, an operable partition, a
floor level change, or even as minimal as differentiation in floor material. The result is a
dynamic learning environment that is flexible & fluid. Subject matters & age levels are not
taught independent of each other. Students can observe the work of other students. There
is sharing amongst both teachers & students.
Connection to Other Classrooms
Certain characteristics are not limited to schools of the future. For instance, the connection
of two classrooms has been a design feature of various eras. In our most recent projects, we
have included an operable partition between classrooms. These giant pocket doors can be
seen at Brownsville & Greer Elementary. Older schools have operable partitions between
pairs of classrooms as well. Unfortunately, this was not always seen as asset & the majority
of them have been effectively locked into place and are no longer operable. They are noted
here, because with some minor renovation work, the connection between the rooms can be
restored. When classrooms are physically connected, it increases the spatial opportunities of
the two rooms, encourages collaboration between the teachers, and is a key advantage
compared to isolated rooms.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 9
5. CONNECTIVITY (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Diagram of Classroom Pairing at Greer Elementary
Connection to Hallway
Hallways are easily 20-30% of the gross square footage a school building. That is a huge
amount of space to be devoted to transit & a temporal state, only utilized in the time between
classes. A connection between a classroom & hallway offers two benefits. First, transparency
offers the benefit of being able to see into a room. This is advantageous to both the students
in the room & the learning opportunity for the student walking by. This is not possible if a
room is shut off from everyone not in the class. A simple window into the room makes this
possible. Secondly, a physical connection between the classroom and the hallways allows the
work in the room to flow out into hallway. This allows an underutilized space to now become
devoted to student space. In high schools, in particular, as lockers become obsolete we must
re-envision the role of hallways & the opportunities they present.
None of the division’s classrooms have a substantial opening into the hallway beyond a door
way (i.e. none have large glass walls, operable partitions, etc.). Many have some sort
transparent connection, though: a window in the classroom door, a side lite, or some other
form. Unfortunately, in most instances the opening is covered up. This is a practice that
should be discouraged. All of this said, we need to be sensitive to the security and safety of
staff and students so that when we create transparency, we also can restrict visibility should
a crisis dictate the need to do so.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 10
5. CONNECTIVITY (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Connection to the Outdoors
In addition to windows & skylights documented when evaluating day lighting, exterior doors
were surveyed as well. The immediate access to the outdoors expands the opportunities of
the four walls of the classrooms. Learning can spill outdoors and benefit from the extra space,
connection to nature, fresh air, daylight and other attributes of the environment.
This is a common design feature in some schools but non-existent in others. Obviously, this
is less feasible in second floor classrooms so these are broken out as a separate item.
Outdoor Access Elementary Middle High
Yes 34% 1% 3%
None (First Floor) 64% 99% 96%
Brownsville Elementary
Photo by VMDO Architects
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 11
6. INFRASTRUCTURE/UTILITIES _________________________________________________________________________
Lighting
Day lighting is preferable, but artificial lighting is also necessary to properly light a space in
most instances. Proper control of this lighting is critical to the function & comfort of the
learning environment. Functionally, different light levels are needed based on the activity
(i.e. using a projector vs. working on an art project).
Our maintenance & environmental programs have done a sufficient job of upgrading lighting
fixtures to more energy-efficient fixtures throughout the division. Occupancy sensors are also
utilized as energy-saving strategy. There are differences, however, in the ability to control
the amount of light. There are three scenarios in our schools related to the lighting control
Dimmable
The optimal artificial lighting in a classroom allows dimming.. This provides the
greatest degree of control over the level of lighting. Most current fluorescent light
fixtures do not provide the ability to be dimmed.
Multiple Switches
The only control of fluorescent fixtures is how they are switched. Each fixture can only
be switched on or off. Classrooms can be wired in a way that half of the lights are on
one switch and the other half on a separate switch. This can give some degree of
control over the amount of light in the space.
Minimal
The last scenario is the fluorescent lighting in the room is on one switch. The lights
are all on or all off.
Lighting Control Elementary Middle High
Dimmable 5% 0% 5%
Multiple Switches 48% 65% 70%
Minimal (on/off) 44% 34% 24%
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 12
6. INFRASTRUCTURE/UTILITIES (CONT.)
_________________________________________________________________________
Heating, Venting, & Air Conditioning (HVAC)
A key aspect of student comfort is temperature, humidity, oxygen levels, etc. The HVAC
system in a school is critical to this. The ability to properly heat, cool & ventilate a space is
contingent on that system. Our mechanical equipment is very well-maintained. A large
portion of the capital maintenance program is devoted to replacement & upgrade of these
systems. This funding should continue. Thermostats in all spaces allow the temperature to
be remotely monitored with our Energy Management System. Required by building code, the
system also provides adequate proper outside air intake & ventilation.
Electricity/Power
As the presence of technology increases in schools, the infrastructure must be there to support
it. The survey documented the presence of electrical outlets in learning spaces. Depending
on the era in which the building was built, the quantity of outlets varies widely. The survey
focused primarily on the accessibility of outlets for students to connect or charge devices.
This is a functional necessity but a safety issue as well. If outlets are not available and/or
accessible, extension cords are used and those represent potential fire hazards. Building
Services is working on a more specific evaluation of schools planning to implement a 1:1
environment; the evaluation larger picture items such as circuit capacity, etc.
Accessible
Outlets Elementary Middle High
Yes 96% 76% 90%
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 13
7. LEARNING SPACES BEYOND THE CLASSROOMS _________________________________________________________________________
The majority of this evaluation and survey was focused on the learning spaces within the
classrooms. However, there are key spaces beyond the classrooms that need specific mention
& attention:
Media Centers
Media centers offer a key opportunity to impact the greatest numbers of students in
a school. All students have access & utilize the media centers in their schools.
Historically, a place to simply check out books and/or a quiet place to study, 21st
century media centers are so much more. They are still the keeper of the books and
still offer a place of solace for some, but now they are also a place for group work, a
place for production, a place for research, a place for performance, and so forth. Spend
some time at Monticello High School and this will become self-evident. Metaphorically,
libraries used to be grocery stores where a student came to pick up items, but today
they are kitchens where students not only shop they cook. Fixed shelving, heavy
wooden furniture, & other traditional features of the spaces are not designed for or
conducive to this new paradigm.
While the majority of media centers in the division have made incremental steps to
make facility improvements, only 5 have had significant ($50,000+) contemporary
renovations. The capital maintenance replacement programs include an annual
funding amount of $90,000 for media center upgrades. This funding is important, but
not substantial enough to make the necessary impact in a reasonable time frame.
Hollymead Media Center: 2013 Renovation Before & After
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 14
7. LEARNING SPACES BEYOND THE CLASSROOMS (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Cafeterias
Cafeterias are often the one of the largest spaces in a school. Unfortunately, they are
only equipped to serve one purpose: serving & eating. They then remain empty the
remainder of the day. This is a lost opportunity to use these large spaces for large
group gatherings, large scale projects, ‘messy’ work or other activities that are not
feasible in smaller spaces.
Eight schools received all new cafeteria furniture in the summer 2013. Only two have
received recent contemporary renovations. Murray Elementary is the best example of
the impact of space improvements.
Murray Elementary Cafeteria:
2013 Renovation Before & After
Specialty Classrooms
Ideally, a truly flexible classroom could accommodate any type of work. However,
there are certain instances where specific equipment, acoustics, or other
characteristics require unique spaces. Examples include:
Art
Music
CTE
Science Labs
Maker Spaces
As in a regular classroom, the work is evolving and so do the spaces. Music should
not be relegated to trailers because proper acoustic control is not in place within the
building. Art rooms should have adequate storage, furniture & technology of the 21st
century. As the curriculum of CTE program change to meet the changing workforce
so too must the spaces. Science rooms should no longer be filled with large fixed lab
stations. These are just some examples of the deficiencies of outdated ‘specialty’
rooms. A detailed evaluation of these types of spaces has not be completed, but would
certainly be warranted.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 15
8. NEXT STEPS _________________________________________________________________________
It is unrealistic to expect a school built in 1960 to look like one built in 2014 no matter how
much work you to do it. However, it is unacceptable to expect the type of work to evolve
without the space evolving as well. With significant capital investment, key improvements
can be made to better support the 21st century student. A capital improvement project
request should be made as follows:
Project Description
This project will begin to fund needed contemporary renovations and refurbishments of
existing school classrooms, libraries, and other elective and support areas consistent with
School Board goals and priorities. Modifications will include furniture and structural
improvements/minor renovation work. The modifications should be comprehensive, but can
be broken down in the following key areas:
Classroom Furniture Upgrade Update furniture to create a flexible &
comfortable learning environment. This includes
ergonomic seating choice, work surfaces that vary
in height & size but are all mobile, & adequate
storage.
Classroom Modernization Renovate classroom spaces to update all finishes,
casework, & lighting. Improve transparency &
connection to adjacent spaces, including the
outdoors if feasible.
Media Center Renovation Renovate media centers to be flexible hubs of
congregation, collaboration, & creation. This
includes updating furniture, shelving, and
accessory spaces.
Cafeteria Renovation Update cafeteria finishes & furniture.
Specialty Classroom Renovation Renovate existing spaces to create state-
of-the-art science, music, art, CTE & other
specialty rooms. Create dedicated maker spaces.
Day lighting Add day lighting to spaces with no or minimal
natural light. As needed, update blinds or shades
in spaces with natural light to better control the
light.
CONTEMPORARY LEARNING SPACE EVALUATION │Page 16
8. NEXT STEPS (CONT.) _________________________________________________________________________
Project Budget Preliminary Numbers, Subject to Change
Scope Cost/Space # of Spaces Total
Classroom Furniture Upgrade $15,000 781 $11,715,000
Classroom Modernization $50,000 725 $36,250,000
Specialty Classroom Renovation:
Art/CTE/Science $50,000 56 $2,800,000
Specialty Classroom Renovation: Music $25,000 32 $800,000
Media Center Renovation $125,000 17 $2,125,000
Cafeteria Renovation $125,000 16.5 $2,062,000
Daylighting $10,000 80 $800,000
Subtotal $56,552,500
Design/PM Fees (10%) $5,655,250
Contingency (10%) $5,655,250
Total $67,863,000
Project Schedule
If the work were to be complete in the next 10 years. The division would need to invest
almost $70 million, or about an average of $7 million per year. The first year would be
intensive programming and the schedule would be finalized during that process. In general,
though, the following guiding principles about phasing would apply:
Do not complete one school at a time. Implementation should be across multiple
schools to ensure schools are incrementally brought up to standard.
Complete work on at least one instructional space at every school within the first 5
years.
At larger schools, complete work on a two year cycle. This allows a year of evaluation to
ensure changes are effective.
School & Room Information
* Required
Room NumberPlease include the letter and number with no punctuation, i.e. - P121
School*
Room NamePlease include the name of the room with no punctuation, i.e. - glassroom
Technology Available
Room Purpose*
Classroom
Lab/Library/Other
Subject Area*
Language Arts
Math
Science
Social Studies
Resource
SPED
Other
Mounted Projector*Yes
Yes, more than one (add how many in comments)
No
Access Point*
Yes
No
Page 1 of 5
TV*Yes (New)
Yes (Old)
No
Interactive Whiteboard*
Yes - Promethean Brand (Activ)
Yes - Smart Brand
Yes - Mimio
No
Document Camera*
Yes
No
Speakers*
Yes
No
Accessible Outlets*Is there reasonable access to electricity that will allow for a student charging space?
Yes
No
Are there concerns about this room? Is a second visit required? *
Yes
No
Other TechnologiesBe specific as possible. (i.e. 15 iPods w/o cameras, 4 digital still cameras, etc.)
Furniture Information
Page 2 of 5
Is the current furniture and arrangement in the room conducive to a 1:1 collaborative learning environment? *
Yes
No
Type of Furniture - Tables *Round
Rectangular
Trapezoid
None
Type of Furniture - Desks *Detached from Chair
Attached from Chair
None
Condition of Furniture - Tables and/or Desks*
Excellent
Good
Poor
Type of Furniture - Chairs (not attached to desks)*
Standard
VS Chairs
Hokki Stools
Balls
Other
Condition of Furniture - Chairs (not attached to desks) *Excellent
Good
Poor
Flexibility of Furniture*Are the desks and/or tables:
Lightweight (one person can move it)
On Casters
Flip-Top (the table top flips to a vertical position for easy storing)
Page 3 of 5
Heavy Tables
Flexibility of Furniture*Are the chairs on casters?
Yes
No
Comfort and Choice of Furniture *Soft Seating Options (upholstered seating, bean bags, etc)
Seating that promotes movement (rocking, bouncing, etc.)
Height adjustable tables/desk (doesn't require a tool or custodian to adjust)
A variety of seating and/or working environments
A place to work on the floor
A place to work standing
Multiple seating options (chair vs. stool, not just two different chairs that are different manufacturers but the same qualities)
None
Daylighting*Does the room receive natural light via any of the following?
Window
Exterior Door
Skylight
No Natural Light
Lighting Control*How much control does the user have over the overhead lighting?
None (The lights can be turned on or off)
Minimal Switching (half of the lights can be turned on or off, or certain areas are separately from the rest of the room)
Adequate (The lights are dimmable)
Surfaces *Are there opportunities to write/work on the walls via the following?
Whiteboards
Chalkboard
Whiteboard Painted Wall
Other
None
Page 4 of 5
Powered by
Storage *What means of storage does the room have?
Closet
Built-in casework (see follow-up question below)
Loose furniture (i.e. bookshelves, mobile wardrobe, etc.)
Student Cubbies
Other
None
Storage*Does the casework appear to be original to the building?
Yes
No
N/A (no built-in casework)
Describe the furniture please.
Any additional information that may be helpful for us to know about this learning space.
This form was created inside of K12albemarle.org.
Report Abuse-Terms of Service-Additional Terms
SubmitNever submit passwords through Google Forms.
Page 5 of 5
Survey Responses: Technology
SCHOOL
# of R
ooms Surve
yed
Mounted Pro
jector
Acces
s Point
TV (OLD)
Interac
tive W
hiteboard
Documen
t Cam
eraSpea
kers
Acces
sible
Outlets
Agnor-Hurt 31 100% 100% 77% 13% 0% 10% 100%Baker Butler 33 100% 100% 97% 3% 61% 3% 97%Brownsville Elementary 41 100% 100% 7% 100% 98% 100% 100%Broadus Wood 23 96% 100% 87% 57% 57% 14% 91%Cale 46 96% 100% 24% 24% 48% 23% 100%Crozet 22 100% 100% 9% 23% 91% 0% 86%Greer 40 100% 100% 18% 98% 5% 100% 100%Hollymead 30 100% 100% 100% 77% 0% 0% 87%Murray ES 19 100% 100% 5% 16% 79% 5% 95%Meriwether Lewis 24 100% 100% 92% 100% 100% 100% 100%Red Hill 13 100% 100% 100% 100% 92% 8% 92%Scottsville 16 100% 100% 81% 94% 44% 0% 100%Stony Point 18 100% 100% 0% 94% 83% 6% 94%Stone Robinson 35 94% 97% 80% 86% 69% 64% 91%Woodbrook 26 100% 100% 69% 42% 0% 0% 100%Yancey 11 91% 100% 0% 91% 73% 10% 100%
ES Total 428 99% 100% 52% 61% 52% 35% 96%
Burley 39 97% 100% 100% 31% 77% 66% 69%Henley 42 100% 98% 52% 43% 90% 81% 88%Jouett 27 93% 93% 100% 26% 78% 88% 78%Sutherland 44 89% 95% 86% 11% 36% 64% 89%Walton 31 94% 100% 3% 26% 29% 0% 71%
MS Total 183 95% 97% 69% 27% 62% 61% 80%
Albemarle 99 97% 100% 81% 55% 51% 41% 91%Monticello 69 96% 99% 1% 55% 30% 79% 96%Murray HS 10 90% 100% 30% 40% 40% 100% 40%Western Albemarle 58 93% 95% 93% 38% 22% 74% 90%
HS Total 236 95% 98% 58% 50% 37% 62% 90%
Total 847 97% 99% 58% 51% 50% 48% 91%
Survey Responses: Furniture
Type of Tables Type of Desk Condition of ChairsType Chairs (not attached to desks)
Condition of Tables and/or Desks
SCHOOL
# of
Roo
ms S
urve
yed
Round
Recta
ngula
r
Trape
zoid
Detac
hed
from
Cha
irAtta
ched
from
Cha
irSta
ndar
d
VS Cha
irsHok
ki Sto
ols/B
alls
Excell
ent
Good
Poor
Excell
ent
Good
Poor
Agnor-Hurt 31 55% 55% 0% 23% 0% 97% 3% 0% 0% 97% 3% 3% 97% 0%Baker Butler 33 30% 30% 0% 55% 3% 97% 0% 3% 3% 97% 0% 3% 97% 0%Brownsville Elementary 41 46% 41% 0% 56% 0% 95% 0% 0% 2% 98% 0% 0% 98% 2%Broadus Wood 23 39% 39% 0% 35% 4% 91% 0% 4% 9% 87% 4% 4% 87% 9%Cale 46 37% 59% 7% 13% 0% 100% 0% 0% 9% 89% 4% 2% 46% 80%Crozet 22 41% 68% 9% 5% 0% 91% 5% 5% 5% 95% 0% 5% 68% 32%Greer 40 58% 53% 3% 23% 3% 23% 78% 18% 20% 75% 5% 75% 13% 13%Hollymead 30 23% 53% 3% 40% 3% 93% 0% 3% 0% 100% 0% 3% 97% 0%Murray ES 19 84% 53% 0% 5% 0% 84% 16% 5% 0% 100% 0% 16% 89% 5%Meriwether Lewis 24 50% 42% 4% 54% 0% 100% 0% 17% 13% 88% 4% 4% 92% 4%Red Hill 13 38% 69% 31% 8% 8% 92% 15% 0% 0% 100% 0% 8% 85% 0%Scottsville 16 44% 50% 31% 31% 6% 100% 0% 6% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0%Stony Point 18 56% 50% 0% 44% 0% 94% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 6% 72% 22%Stone Robinson 35 26% 57% 0% 46% 0% 100% 0% 0% 3% 97% 0% 0% 100% 0%Woodbrook 26 54% 50% 0% 58% 0% 96% 4% 0% 0% 96% 8% 4% 92% 4%Yancey 11 64% 55% 9% 9% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 9% 0% 100% 18%
ES Total 428 45% 51% 4% 34% 1% 89% 9% 4% 5% 94% 2% 10% 80% 14%
Burley 39 3% 33% 0% 67% 10% 92% 3% 5% 3% 97% 0% 3% 95% 0%Henley 42 7% 36% 7% 88% 2% 95% 5% 5% 7% 93% 0% 5% 95% 0%Jouett 27 11% 52% 7% 56% 0% 85% 0% 0% 4% 81% 4% 0% 89% 0%Sutherland 44 9% 80% 5% 91% 0% 95% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 5% 95% 0%Walton 31 39% 35% 6% 42% 0% 94% 0% 0% 13% 42% 52% 0% 55% 48%
MS Total 183 13% 48% 5% 72% 3% 93% 2% 2% 5% 85% 9% 3% 87% 8%
Albemarle 99 7% 66% 3% 53% 40% 98% 2% 0% 9% 74% 23% 11% 79% 19%Monticello 69 10% 58% 1% 68% 0% 94% 4% 0% 3% 97% 0% 3% 97% 0%Murray HS 10 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 90% 10% 70% 60% 70% 0% 80% 90% 0%Western Albemarle 58 12% 67% 3% 81% 9% 93% 2% 2% 5% 78% 17% 2% 74% 24%
HS Total 236 9% 65% 3% 66% 19% 95% 3% 3% 8% 81% 14% 9% 83% 14%
Total 847 28% 54% 4% 51% 7% 92% 6% 3% 6% 88% 7% 8% 82% 13%
Survey Responses: Furniture (cont.)
Comfort & ChoiceFlexibility
SCHOOL
# of
Roo
ms S
urve
yed
On Cas
ters
Flip-T
op T
ables
Yes
Soft S
eatin
g Opt
ions
Mult
iple
seat
ing o
ption
s
Seatin
g th
at p
rom
otes
mov
emen
t
A varie
ty of
seat
ing
and/
or w
orkin
g
envir
onm
ents
A p
lace
to w
ork o
n th
e
floor
A plac
e to
wor
k sta
nding
Height
adju
stable
table
s/des
k
None
Agnor-Hurt 31 6% 6% 13% 0% 0% 6% 10% 58% 0% 0% 29%Baker Butler 33 3% 3% 15% 0% 0% 0% 3% 91% 0% 0% 6%Brownsville Elementary 41 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 88% 0% 0% 10%Broadus Wood 23 0% 4% 13% 0% 4% 0% 0% 87% 0% 0% 9%Cale 46 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 91% 2% 0% 2%Crozet 22 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 95% 5% 0% 5%Greer 40 0% 3% 5% 0% 15% 0% 5% 65% 0% 0% 20%Hollymead 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 90% 3% 0% 7%Murray ES 19 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 89% 0% 0% 11%Meriwether Lewis 24 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 96% 4% 0% 4%Red Hill 13 23% 0% 0% 38% 0% 0% 54% 62% 8% 0% 23%Scottsville 16 0% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0% 69% 6% 0% 13%Stony Point 18 0% 0% 6% 6% 0% 0% 6% 83% 0% 0% 11%Stone Robinson 35 0% 0% 3% 6% 0% 0% 29% 77% 3% 0% 11%Woodbrook 26 4% 0% 4% 27% 0% 8% 0% 65% 0% 4% 19%Yancey 11 0% 0% 18% 73% 0% 0% 0% 82% 0% 0% 18%
ES Total 428 2% 1% 4% 7% 2% 1% 7% 81% 2% 0% 12%
Burley 39 0% 0% 0% 26% 0% 5% 3% 3% 5% 0% 69%Henley 42 5% 5% 5% 10% 7% 5% 7% 0% 10% 5% 83%Jouett 27 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 81%Sutherland 44 0% 0% 0% 16% 5% 5% 11% 0% 2% 2% 80%Walton 31 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 90%
MS Total 183 1% 1% 2% 14% 3% 3% 5% 1% 4% 2% 80%
Albemarle 99 2% 3% 3% 10% 9% 0% 11% 0% 7% 0% 80%Monticello 69 4% 0% 4% 14% 16% 4% 10% 0% 13% 1% 64%Murray HS 10 30% 0% 20% 80% 80% 90% 60% 0% 0% 10% 0%Western Albemarle 58 3% 2% 3% 10% 16% 3% 17% 0% 19% 0% 72%
HS Total 236 4% 2% 4% 14% 16% 6% 14% 0% 11% 1% 70%
Total 847 2% 1% 4% 10% 6% 3% 46% 1% 5% 1% 43%
Survey Responses: Other Space Characteristics
StorageSurfacesLighting ControlDaylighting
SCHOOL
# of
Roo
ms S
urve
yed
Wind
ow
Exterio
r Doo
r
Skylig
ht
No Nat
ural
Light
None
Mini
mal
Switchin
gAde
quat
e
Whit
eboa
rds
Chalkb
oard
Whit
eboa
rd P
ainte
d W
allNon
e
Closet
Buil
t-in
case
work
Loos
e fu
rnitu
reStu
dent
Cub
bies
None
Agnor-Hurt 31 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 77% 94% 3% 0% 68% 3% 87% 94% 0%Baker Butler 33 97% 0% 0% 3% 0% 100% 0% 100% 97% 0% 0% 3% 0% 9% 0% 0%Brownsville Elementary 41 100% 24% 12% 0% 27% 44% 29% 98% 2% 2% 0% 5% 0% 100% 0% 0%Broadus Wood 23 100% 52% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 96% 61% 0% 0% 35% 0% 83% 0% 0%Cale 46 98% 83% 0% 0% 50% 50% 0% 93% 76% 0% 0% 46% 0% 85% 4% 0%Crozet 22 100% 36% 0% 0% 23% 77% 0% 95% 64% 5% 0% 82% 0% 86% 73% 0%Greer 40 85% 0% 0% 15% 90% 10% 0% 95% 15% 3% 0% 3% 0% 70% 43% 8%Hollymead 30 100% 17% 0% 0% 43% 53% 0% 100% 53% 0% 0% 10% 0% 100% 0% 0%Murray ES 19 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 58% 100% 89% 0% 0% 32% 0% 95% 32% 0%Meriwether Lewis 24 100% 38% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 13% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0%Red Hill 13 100% 100% 0% 0% 38% 62% 0% 69% 54% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 69% 0%Scottsville 16 94% 88% 6% 0% 94% 6% 0% 100% 13% 0% 0% 88% 0% 88% 0% 6%Stony Point 18 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 28% 83% 0% 0% 0% 0% 67% 6% 0%Stone Robinson 35 97% 14% 0% 3% 0% 100% 0% 89% 77% 0% 0% 23% 0% 100% 14% 0%Woodbrook 26 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 77% 38% 0%Yancey 11 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 55% 0% 100% 27% 0%ES Total 428 98% 34% 1% 2% 44% 48% 5% 92% 51% 1% 0% 34% 0% 82% 29% 1%Burley 39 97% 0% 0% 3% 18% 82% 0% 95% 26% 0% 0% 26% 0% 77% 0% 0%Henley 42 88% 0% 0% 12% 36% 64% 0% 79% 48% 0% 4% 2% 0% 43% 0% 5%Jouett 27 70% 0% 0% 30% 7% 93% 0% 93% 56% 0% 4% 0% 0% 26% 0% 7%Sutherland 44 89% 2% 0% 9% 30% 70% 0% 89% 75% 0% 0% 7% 0% 11% 0% 5%Walton 31 55% 3% 0% 45% 97% 0% 0% 90% 26% 0% 0% 16% 0% 52% 0% 16%MS Total 183 82% 1% 0% 17% 37% 63% 0% 89% 47% 0% 1% 10% 0% 42% 0% 6%Albemarle 99 80% 5% 0% 18% 6% 90% 2% 90% 17% 1% 1% 23% 0% 88% 0% 0%Monticello 69 88% 3% 0% 10% 6% 80% 14% 84% 77% 0% 0% 23% 0% 62% 0% 16%Murray HS 10 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 50% 0% 70% 20% 0%Western Albemarle 58 69% 2% 2% 28% 79% 19% 0% 45% 83% 2% 2% 26% 0% 86% 0% 0%HS Total 236 81% 3% 0% 17% 24% 70% 5% 78% 50% 1% 1% 25% 0% 79% 1% 5%Total 1694 45% 9% 0% 5% 18% 29% 2% 44% 25% 0% 0% 13% 0% 36% 7% 2%